|
Using Technology to Facilitate ASHA Governance
Evolving electronic communication technologies must be considered and explored as means by which to improve the efficiency and increase the cost effectiveness of ASHA's governance process. As the Governance Restructure Design Team has considered methods by which ASHA's governing body may make policy decisions on a year-round basis, at least one face-to-face meeting of the body has been assumed. Distance communication will not totally replace meeting face to face, but it is likely to do so to some extent.
This report focuses on technologies that may have some practical use for reducing the dependence on face-to-face meetings as ASHA does business and to which many members have access. For all of the technologies it is assumed that participants will seek out and participate in whatever training is necessary to ensure that they become proficient users of any technology used to enhance communication and complete governance activities.
TECHNOLOGY: Listserv
POSSIBLE USE: Conduct dialogues among governance group members and other Listserv subscribers; send messages to an entire group of subscribers; can use for voting if put a yes or no in the subject area.
ADVANTAGES: Easy access; just need access to the Internet; don't need World Wide Web access; easy to compose and send messages; can be used to send individual or group messages; messages can be read at any convenient time.
DISADVANTAGES: If there are a large number of subscribers and a high level of participation, each subscriber could get 20, 40, 100 email messages a day; messages not categorized by topic; participants need training in how to address, compose, and sign off on messages.
ASHA COST: Once ASHA has installed the servers to handle Listserv, the cost will be minimal. Current cost with an outside vendor is less than $200 per Listserv.
USER COST: Must have computer, modem, and software to access the Internet. If a computer must be purchased, an adequate machine costs $1,500-$2,000; modem costs less than $500. If an Internet Service Provider (ISP) is used, the monthly cost is $10-20.
A Listserv Scenario
The following scenario is offered as an example of the usability of the Listserv for governance:
- LC members would all be required to subscribe to a Listserv. Resolutions, and perhaps other items of business, could be identified so that "threads" of information exchange evolve. A time limit, such as one month, would be established for this "debate."
- A "monitor" (organizing person) would be identified to be responsible for one thread. Perhaps some editing could be done by the monitor and/or others, such as a resolutions committee, on each thread to remove extraneous information, or a thread might be retained in its entirety without editing. In either case, Legislative Council members should be instructed to avoid any extraneous information and stick to the point of the resolution or particular item of business and not repeat the same argument over and over. The monitoring person would then download the thread onto ASHA's Web site to a link devoted solely to ASHA governmental business, and that would be recognized as an interactive "forum." Any ASHA member having the proper Web browser (e.g., Netscape) could then gain access to the forum and offer comments relative to the thread of information. Council members, of course, also would have access, but they would be instructed not to comment at this point because they have already had their chance to debate. At this point Council members should not further bias member input. Each item on the Web forum also would have a time limit, again, perhaps one month.
- The monitoring person would redirect the thread from the Web forum back to the Legislative Council Listserv for final vote by Council members. Perhaps final debate could occur. The vote itself would be done via the Internet, and Legislative Council members would have a time limit for final debate and voting, again, perhaps one month. In this fashion, the whole process would take no longer than three months.
More on Email
With email access being a prerequisite for Listserv use and if all Legislative Councilors had their email addresses included in the Council directory published in the ASHA Leader, email could also be sent to them from links established within the ASHA Web site. This would increase Legislative Council members' ability to serve its many constituents who use this form of communication. Given the proposed shift in the role of Legislative Council from a body that tends to vote reactively on policy issues to one that proactively represents member interests, mandating email access would improve the linkage between Legislative Council and the membership.
TECHNOLOGY: Web-Based Bulletin Board
POSSIBLE USE: Conduct dialogues among governance group members and other groups/members allowed to have access to the bulletin board.
ADVANTAGES: Easy access; can have a private bulletin board; messages can be threaded to relate to a specific topic, resolution, or issue; can select a specific topic to read; don't have to read all messages; all messages don't appear in your email. Easy to compose and send messages; messages can be read at any convenient time.
DISADVANTAGES: No daily prompts to read messages because they don't appear in email; some participants may not read messages submitted on some topics if not prompted by daily message; need more computer skills to access the bulletin board via the Internet and the World Wide Web.
ASHA COST: Once ASHA has installed the servers to handle Web-based bulletin boards the cost will be minimal. Current cost with an outside vendor is up to $100 per hour to set up and maintain a Web-based bulletin board.
USER COST: Must have computer, modem, and software to access the Internet and a Web browser to access the WWW. If a computer must be purchased, an adequate machine costs $1,500-$2,000; modem costs less than $500. If an Internet Service Provider (ISP) is used, the monthly cost is $10-20. Web browser software is usually free.
TECHNOLOGY: Newsgroups
POSSIBLE USE: Conduct dialogues among governance group members and other groups/members who have access to the Newsgroup.
ADVANTAGES: Not many; everyone can have access. LC-FORUM Listserv discussion could be duplicated as a newsgroup that members could review, allowing a "gallery" for the membership to view Legislative Council debate.
DISADVANTAGES: Not private, anyone can access; some ISPs charge extra for access to Newsgroups; the user needs software that allows for reading
ASHA COST: Once ASHA has installed the servers to handle Newsgroups the cost would be minimal. Currently ASHA does not provide access to Newsgroups.
USER COST: Must have computer, modem, and software to access the Internet. If a computer must be purchased, an adequate machine costs $1,500-$2,000; modem costs less than $500. If an ISP is used the monthly cost is $10-20. May be an extra charge from the ISP to have access to and read Newsgroups.
TECHNOLOGY: Chat Rooms
POSSIBLE USE: Conduct dialogues among governance group members and other groups/members allowed to have access to the chat room.
ADVANTAGES: Easy access once chat room software is installed; can have a private chat room board; real-time discussion on issues; dialogue on the chat room can be saved for hard copy review; if the user has two phone lines, group can do computer chat and live conference call simultaneously.
DISADVANTAGES: Need more advanced computer skills to download and install the chat room software; to have a real-time chat, participants must be at computer that is capable of accessing the chat room; during the chat, intermediate responses are sometimes confusing; not good for large groups of participants. Intermediate responses are sometimes confusing and may artificially create a barrier to communication due to the disconnect between the original comment and the response. If there is a need for a moderator, this is an additional cost.
ASHA COST: Once ASHA has installed the servers to handle chat rooms the cost will be minimal. Currently, ASHF has a grant from Microsoft to conduct chat rooms with an outside vendor. There is no cost to ASHA or the foundation.
USER COST: Must have computer, modem, and software to access the Internet and a Web browser to access the WWW. If a computer must be purchased, an adequate machine costs $1,500-$2,000; modem costs less than $500. If an ISP is used the monthly cost is $10-20. Web browser software is usually free. Will need to download the necessary chat room software, which also is usually free.
TECHNOLOGY: Videoconferencing via Computer
POSSIBLE USE: Conduct dialogues among governance group members and other groups/members who have access to computer videoconferencing capabilities.
ADVANTAGES: Can have visual image interaction in real-time; can respond to visual images; can show graphics.
DISADVANTAGES: Not good for large groups, 4-6 participants is ideal; need a high-speed Internet connection to have good quality video; need high-quality computer/video camera; more advanced computer skills needed to use computer/video software and equipment; need to download and install videoconferencing software; to have a real-time videoconference participants must be at computer that has videoconferencing capabilities; images during the videoconference are jerky and may not always be clear, depending on the quality of the video equipment used and the speed of the Internet connection. Must use public networks to use videoconferencing unless a special intranet is set up.
ASHA COST: ASHA does not have videoconferencing capability. Once ASHA has installed the servers, software, and equipment to handle computer videoconferencing the cost will be minimal. It would be difficult and costly to set up an ASHA intranet because of the variety of locations around the country. Under the current governance structure there could be up to 200 locations. The cost to set up a proprietary intranet would be considerable.
USER COST: Must have a video enhanced computer, modem, and software to access the Internet and a Web browser to access the WWW. Also need to have computer video equipment and software. Hardware/modem/video camera costs: $3000 or less. If an ISP is used the monthly cost is $10-20. Web browser software is usually free. Videoconferencing software can usually be downloaded from the WWW for free. A high-speed Internet connection could cost up to $50 per month.
TECHNOLOGY: Audio/Teleconferencing via Telephone
POSSIBLE USE: Conduct dialogues among governance group members and other groups/members who have access to the audio/teleconference.
ADVANTAGES: Can have discussions on issues or specific topics among large and small groups; easy access anyplace there is a telephone; can have role call votes or vote by phone following the audio/teleconference; no special equipment other than a telephone is needed.
DISADVANTAGES: Not good for really large groups; if doing audio and chat room at the same time you need two telephone lines.
ASHA COST: Current cost to ASHA to conduct an audio/teleconference is $.40 per minute per person. To conduct votes via the phone, the cost is $1.00 per participant.
USER COST: Must have access to a telephone.
TECHNOLOGY: Interactive Voice Response System
POSSIBLE USE: Review specified documents and vote as needed.
ADVANTAGES: Review of issue and voting can be done at anytime. Can have easy access anyplace there is a telephone; no special equipment other than a touch tone telephone is needed. Automated and confidential method of processing votes.
DISADVANTAGES: No interaction among participants.
ASHA COST: Cost to ASHA to have special software developed for ASHA purposes is $15-20,000.
USER COST: Must have access to a touch tone telephone.
NOTE: This simple technology could be utilized as a means of voting on issues that have been debated on the Listserv, substantially facilitating the ability of the governing body to do business on an ongoing basis.
TECHNOLOGY: Multipoint/Satellite Videoconferencing
POSSIBLE USE: To conduct additional "face to face" meeting(s) of the governing body(ies).
ADVANTAGES: Local or regional sites from which councilors (or board members) could participate would reduce travel and expedite attendance at additional meetings. After adjusting to the technology, participants' behavior is quite similar to face to face meetings.
DISADVANTAGES: Potentially costly. The logistics of interaction among the currently large number of councilors would be difficult.
ASHA COST: Vendors list satellite production costs ranging from $35 - $150 per hour; ASHA's experience/information is that studio time and an uplink connection for a 4-hour interactive session costs $50,000.
Vendors give satellite downlink costs of $35-$70 per hour. ASHA's experience (again, given a 4-hour interactive session) is that downlinks cost $200 per site. Therefore, if there are only a few sites, downlink costs would be between $500 and $2,000.
Land line connections are currently typical for two-way interactive video. Costs vary, but in general range from $20-$50 per hour, and can go up to $300, depending upon the technology used. Relative to the lump sum costs given above, land line connections are somewhat cheaper than satellite connections.
USER COST: It is assumed that ASHA would absorb most or all of the cost of this type of virtual meeting. Remote users could reduce the cost if they have local access to videoconferencing facilities.
OTHER TECHNOLOGY
Among other systems/software available to conduct business are whiteboard software and Lotus Notes that allow for real-time editing of documents. There also is software, such as Microsoft NetMeeting, that has chat room, videoconferencing, and whiteboard capabilities all bundled together. The user requirements are similar to many of the technologies above-computer, modem, software, and Internet connections.
SUMMARY
The use of some of the technologies described above is limited by the numbers of people involved. For instance, a telephone conference call or a chat room can be useful for a relatively limited number of participants. While a large number may be accommodated by videoconferencing, the increased cost and the limited availability of the technology are barriers to its routine use at present. This suggests another barrier to the use of technology in ASHA's governance Process: That its use is reduced to the lowest common denominator in terms of the skill of its users and its availability to them.
The Governance Restructure Design Team also realizes that technology may support effective governance processes, but it does not improve ineffective governance processes. While the Design Team is working to try to improve the governance process, it is probably best to gradually increase the level of sophistication of the technology used to facilitate that process-keeping the least common technology denominator in mind. For instance, if all of the governing body members have email access, then Listserv could be used to debate an issue, and the interactive voice response system could be used for secure voting. Continued exploration of these evolving technologies is in order.
INFORMATION SOURCES
This report is based on information collected and prepared by the members of the Technology Subcommittee of the ASHA Governance Restructure Design Team (Herb Baum, Stan Dublinske, Mary Gray, David Kuehn, and David Stein, Chair). Much of the information was supplied via personal communication between Stan Dublinske and the following members of the ASHA National Office Staff: Mike Guerrieri, Director, Management Information Systems; Bob Vitter, Computer Consultant; and Linda Tsantis, Director, Academic Affairs. World Wide Web sites from which some of this information was gleaned were those maintained by Pacific Bell; and by Extramural Programs, Continuing Education and Public Service, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Return to Table of Contents
|